Creationists

[Youwerecreated]

It's a simple observation that rivers lead to to sea. We don't need you mumbo jumbo of magical gawds to know this. Any seagoing culture would note this-- in fact, in their trips to the new world, the Spaniards rejoiced at reaching the Amazon delta, because the fresh water extended miles and miles out to sea. It was an indication that land was near. For your edification, seawter is differentiated from fresh as distinguished by varying degrees of salinity, temperature and density.

While ancient Middle Easterners were not great naval powers — traders and merchantmen would have known this phenomenon of mighty rivers and could relay their experiences as well.

Further, you're writing your own version of the bible to suggest that the other bible describes a hydologic system.

So 3,500 years ago man knew and understood the hydrologic system just by observation ?The writings of the bible was inspired by the designer it makes sense that the writings were inspired by the designer since man did not fully understand the hydrologic system but the hydrologic system was written about 3,500 years ago. I don't think man understood the hydrologic system at the time of the writings and it took modern technology that helped us understand the hydrologic system. Just more evidence that supports that the creator inspired the bible writings.

There is no hydrologic system described in any of the bibles. I explained this to you but its obvious that you have difficulty understanding and comprehending what you read.

No supermagical gawds inspired any bibles as we know, they were written by various men .

A few other things thrown in for good measure here.

Biblical evidences for Science

 

[CrackedSkull]

Proving the Bible with itself is futile. Proving Winnie the Pooh with the book can be done as well. Frigging board won't let me post url's.

 

[Hollie]

So 3,500 years ago man knew and understood the hydrologic system just by observation ?The writings of the bible was inspired by the designer it makes sense that the writings were inspired by the designer since man did not fully understand the hydrologic system but the hydrologic system was written about 3,500 years ago. I don't think man understood the hydrologic system at the time of the writings and it took modern technology that helped us understand the hydrologic system. Just more evidence that supports that the creator inspired the bible writings.

There is no hydrologic system described in any of the bibles. I explained this to you but its obvious that you have difficulty understanding and comprehending what you read.

No supermagical gawds inspired any bibles as we know, they were written by various men .

A few other things thrown in for good measure here.

Biblical evidences for Science

You should throw them out as being nonsensical for good measure.

 

[Hollie]

So 3,500 years ago man knew and understood the hydrologic system just by observation ?The writings of the bible was inspired by the designer it makes sense that the writings were inspired by the designer since man did not fully understand the hydrologic system but the hydrologic system was written about 3,500 years ago. I don't think man understood the hydrologic system at the time of the writings and it took modern technology that helped us understand the hydrologic system. Just more evidence that supports that the creator inspired the bible writings.

There is no hydrologic system described in any of the bibles. I explained this to you but its obvious that you have difficulty understanding and comprehending what you read.

No supermagical gawds inspired any bibles as we know, they were written by various men .

I will show you when I return from Texas.

Actually, no, you won't. Cutting and pasting nonsense from bible ministries only serves to make you look like a cult follower.

 

[ima]

So how did whomever wrote Genesis know that the world was made in 6 days, since he wasn't there and was only "inspired" by god to write Genesis, and not told directly by god what happened?

Please, no douche links.

 

[CrackedSkull]

It's called Enuma Elish it's a Babylonian creation epic....written in the 12th Century...Moses supposedly wrote Genesis in the 13th Century. Sorry unable to post links not enough frigging posts yet.

 

[UltimateReality]

Cracked Skull, we already have our resident clown Hawly for comedy in this thread. I'm not sure we can do with another person posting up irrational silliness.

 

[CrackedSkull]

Cracked Skull, we already have our resident clown Hawly for comedy in this thread. I'm not sure we can do with another person posting up irrational silliness.

Now if you prefer name calling over debate I will oblige you there as well.....do your research and stop buying everything your fed by Fundamentalist. Have a nice day.

This version was written sometime in the 12th century BC in cuneiform on seven clay tablets. They were found in the middle 19th century in the ruins of the palace of Ashurbanipal in Nineveh. George Smith first published these texts in 1876 as The Chaldean Genesis. Because of many parallels with the Genesis account, some historians concluded that the Genesis account was simply a rewriting of the Babylonian story. As a reaction, many who wanted to maintain the uniqueness of the Bible argued either that there were no real parallels between the accounts or that the Genesis narratives were written first and the Babylonian myth borrowed from the biblical account.

http://www.cresourcei.org/enumaelish.html

Chaldean Account of Genesis.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/ane/caog/index.htm

You think christianity is the only sect that had a creation story?

http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ab83

So it purports nothing new just a rehash of the myths before it.

 

[UltimateReality]

Cracked Skull, we already have our resident clown Hawly for comedy in this thread. I'm not sure we can do with another person posting up irrational silliness.

Now if you prefer name calling over debate I will oblige you there as well.....

Sad that no one who has frequented here can actually engage in a debate. This thread has been riddled with intellectual dishonesty and ad hominem attacks from atheists with an agenda.

Have you taken a look at your Avatar lately Captain Obvious? Wouldn't necessarily say that calling you a clown was name calling.

This version was written sometime in the 12th century BC in cuneiform on seven clay tablets. They were found in the middle 19th century in the ruins of the palace of Ashurbanipal in Nineveh. George Smith first published these texts in 1876 as The Chaldean Genesis. Because of many parallels with the Genesis account, some historians concluded that the Genesis account was simply a rewriting of the Babylonian story. As a reaction, many who wanted to maintain the uniqueness of the Bible argued either that there were no real parallels between the accounts or that the Genesis narratives were written first and the Babylonian myth borrowed from the biblical account.

The Enuma Elish: The Babylonian Creation Myth

Chaldean Account of Genesis.
The Chaldean Account of Genesis Index

You think christianity is the only sect that had a creation story?

CREATION STORIES

So it purports nothing new just a rehash of the myths before it.

You make the fallacy of assuming that both accounts are myths. Since the Creation story is true, why would the Judeo-Christiani religion be the only religion that would have it as part of their history? Truth, no matter what religion it shows up in, always comes from God.

While the dating of the clay tablets may be accurate, this misses one very important fact. The Genesis story, while "written" down by Moses, had been a part of the Israelite's oral tradition for at least 1000 years, if not several thousand years by the time Moses took a chisel to rock.

By the way, while I believe in Creationism, I am not a "young earth" Creationist. I believe in a 4.5 Billion year old earth.

 

[CrackedSkull]

Cracked Skull, we already have our resident clown Hawly for comedy in this thread. I'm not sure we can do with another person posting up irrational silliness.

Now if you prefer name calling over debate I will oblige you there as well.....

This version was written sometime in the 12th century BC in cuneiform on seven clay tablets. They were found in the middle 19th century in the ruins of the palace of Ashurbanipal in Nineveh. George Smith first published these texts in 1876 as The Chaldean Genesis. Because of many parallels with the Genesis account, some historians concluded that the Genesis account was simply a rewriting of the Babylonian story. As a reaction, many who wanted to maintain the uniqueness of the Bible argued either that there were no real parallels between the accounts or that the Genesis narratives were written first and the Babylonian myth borrowed from the biblical account.

The Enuma Elish: The Babylonian Creation Myth

Chaldean Account of Genesis.
The Chaldean Account of Genesis Index

You think christianity is the only sect that had a creation story?

CREATION STORIES

So it purports nothing new just a rehash of the myths before it.

You make the fallacy of assuming that both accounts are myths. Since the Creation story is true, why would the Judeo-Christiani religion be the only religion that would have it as part of their history? Truth, no matter what religion it shows up in, always comes from God.

While the dating of the clay tablets may be accurate, this misses one very important fact. The Genesis story, while "written" down by Moses, had been apart of the Israelite's oral tradition for at least 1000 years, if not several thousand years by the time Moses took a chisel to rock.

By the way, while I believe in Creationism, I am not a "young earth" Creationist. I believe in a 4.5 Billion year old earth.

You make the fallacy of assuming that both accounts are myths.

No, no, not a fallacy they are myths.

Since the Creation story is true, why would the Judeo-Christiani religion be the only religion that would have it as part of their history?

Your kidding right? You actually believe it's true?

 

[UltimateReality]

Your kidding right? You actually believe it's true?

Yeah, because this just happened by random chance. I have some beach front property in Arizona for sale too.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=I9ArIJWYZHI]Mechanism of DNA Replication (Advanced) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[UltimateReality]

Sorry, I left out the (48) "might haves" and "could haves" that explain DNA replication by chance.

 

[UltimateReality]

No, no, not a fallacy they are myths.

So you believe the Darwinian Myth is responsible for Computers and Rocket ships?

 

[CrackedSkull]

Still myth..........sorry.

 

[CrackedSkull]

No, no, not a fallacy they are myths.

So you believe the Darwinian Myth is responsible for Computers and Rocket ships?

Nope...man is.....2000 year old creation myths account for just that myths....

 

[Hollie]

No, no, not a fallacy they are myths.

So you believe the Darwinian Myth is responsible for Computers and Rocket ships?

Darwinian theory deals with natural, biological processes.

Computers and Rocket ships don't procreate or evolve by natural processes.

Your profoundly stupid comparisons only serve to suggest that you need to drink the Kool-aid and prove a component of Darwins' theory.

 

[Hollie]

Your kidding right? You actually believe it's true?

Yeah, because this just happened by random chance. I have some beach front property in Arizona for sale too.

Let me guess - Ann Gauger sold you beachfront property in Arizona.

It must have been the photos' of the property she phonied-up by standing in front of a green screen.

Yeah - those creationist phonies find lemmings like you for the slaughter.

 

[Hollie]

Cracked Skull, we already have our resident clown Hawly for comedy in this thread. I'm not sure we can do with another person posting up irrational silliness.

Now if you prefer name calling over debate I will oblige you there as well.....

Sad that no one who has frequented here can actually engage in a debate. This thread has been riddled with intellectual dishonesty and ad hominem attacks from atheists with an agenda.

Have you taken a look at your Avatar lately Captain Obvious? Wouldn't necessarily say that calling you a clown was name calling.

This version was written sometime in the 12th century BC in cuneiform on seven clay tablets. They were found in the middle 19th century in the ruins of the palace of Ashurbanipal in Nineveh. George Smith first published these texts in 1876 as The Chaldean Genesis. Because of many parallels with the Genesis account, some historians concluded that the Genesis account was simply a rewriting of the Babylonian story. As a reaction, many who wanted to maintain the uniqueness of the Bible argued either that there were no real parallels between the accounts or that the Genesis narratives were written first and the Babylonian myth borrowed from the biblical account.

The Enuma Elish: The Babylonian Creation Myth

Chaldean Account of Genesis.
The Chaldean Account of Genesis Index

You think christianity is the only sect that had a creation story?

CREATION STORIES

So it purports nothing new just a rehash of the myths before it.

You make the fallacy of assuming that both accounts are myths. Since the Creation story is true, why would the Judeo-Christiani religion be the only religion that would have it as part of their history? Truth, no matter what religion it shows up in, always comes from God.

While the dating of the clay tablets may be accurate, this misses one very important fact. The Genesis story, while "written" down by Moses, had been a part of the Israelite's oral tradition for at least 1000 years, if not several thousand years by the time Moses took a chisel to rock.

By the way, while I believe in Creationism, I am not a "young earth" Creationist. I believe in a 4.5 Billion year old earth.

There is no evidence the creation tale is true. Science has disproved the tales you dreamy-eyed YEC'ers like to peddle as real.

Creationist clowns have a habit of making false claims and then running for the exits when pressed to support those claims. When your best effort amounts to cutting and pasting falsified, edited and phony "quotes" from christian creationist ministries, its time to peddle your snake oil elsewhere.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Now if you prefer name calling over debate I will oblige you there as well.....

Sad that no one who has frequented here can actually engage in a debate. This thread has been riddled with intellectual dishonesty and ad hominem attacks from atheists with an agenda.

Have you taken a look at your Avatar lately Captain Obvious? Wouldn't necessarily say that calling you a clown was name calling.

The Enuma Elish: The Babylonian Creation Myth

Chaldean Account of Genesis.
The Chaldean Account of Genesis Index

You think christianity is the only sect that had a creation story?

CREATION STORIES

So it purports nothing new just a rehash of the myths before it.

You make the fallacy of assuming that both accounts are myths. Since the Creation story is true, why would the Judeo-Christiani religion be the only religion that would have it as part of their history? Truth, no matter what religion it shows up in, always comes from God.

While the dating of the clay tablets may be accurate, this misses one very important fact. The Genesis story, while "written" down by Moses, had been a part of the Israelite's oral tradition for at least 1000 years, if not several thousand years by the time Moses took a chisel to rock.

By the way, while I believe in Creationism, I am not a "young earth" Creationist. I believe in a 4.5 Billion year old earth.

There is no evidence the creation tale is true. Science has disproved the tales you dreamy-eyed YEC'ers like to peddle as real.

Creationist clowns have a habit of making false claims and then running for the exits when pressed to support those claims. When your best effort amounts to cutting and pasting falsified, edited and phony "quotes" from christian creationist ministries, its time to peddle your snake oil elsewhere.

I notice you totally ignored responding with any kind of rebuttal to the DNA replication video from UR, typical from you. Still waiting on a viable explanation on the origins of life.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Now if you prefer name calling over debate I will oblige you there as well.....

Sad that no one who has frequented here can actually engage in a debate. This thread has been riddled with intellectual dishonesty and ad hominem attacks from atheists with an agenda.

Have you taken a look at your Avatar lately Captain Obvious? Wouldn't necessarily say that calling you a clown was name calling.

The Enuma Elish: The Babylonian Creation Myth

Chaldean Account of Genesis.
The Chaldean Account of Genesis Index

You think christianity is the only sect that had a creation story?

CREATION STORIES

So it purports nothing new just a rehash of the myths before it.

You make the fallacy of assuming that both accounts are myths. Since the Creation story is true, why would the Judeo-Christiani religion be the only religion that would have it as part of their history? Truth, no matter what religion it shows up in, always comes from God.

While the dating of the clay tablets may be accurate, this misses one very important fact. The Genesis story, while "written" down by Moses, had been a part of the Israelite's oral tradition for at least 1000 years, if not several thousand years by the time Moses took a chisel to rock.

By the way, while I believe in Creationism, I am not a "young earth" Creationist. I believe in a 4.5 Billion year old earth.

There is no evidence the creation tale is true. Science has disproved the tales you dreamy-eyed YEC'ers like to peddle as real.

Creationist clowns have a habit of making false claims and then running for the exits when pressed to support those claims. When your best effort amounts to cutting and pasting falsified, edited and phony "quotes" from christian creationist ministries, its time to peddle your snake oil elsewhere.

While you are at It how did they disprove creation ?